Institute of Historic Building Conservation Report to Council by the Consultant Consultations Co-ordinator 1. There has been a considerable adverse reaction from to the proposed PPS, some reasonably justified and some not. Some of this wants more integration with mainstream planning agendas and some is asking for more absolute protection of heritage as a cultural resource. 2. It is important to recognise that the PPS is not a general synopsis of the role of heritage in planning. It is specific advice to local authorities on the policy implications of their specific duties as LPAs under the Planning Acts. 3. It seems to me that it is likely that PPS15 will be issued in something like the draft form and that complaints about its form and overall approach and content are likely to be disregarded. 4. It follows that, to be influential, we must be very specific about its failings and about what suitably succinct forms of words are necessary to make a workable document. 5. Like it or not, the PPS will not contain any Guidance. The linkages into appropriate Guidance are therefore crucial. The current draft Guidance is pretty effete and hard to comment on until our thoughts on the PPS itself are firmer. Actually, I have had very little comment from members on the Guidance. There is a lot of good guidance out there. Linkages into it, and a commitment to fill gaps, are essential. Most sought after is usable “ready reckoner” guidance (as Dave Burton-Pye put it) to replace Annex C. 6. I hope the undergoing is a useful start. The proposed alterations are not “tracked” in a Microsoft sense so don't be surprised if you can't make this work. If you want to make further suggested changes, please do not use tracking. This usually gets in a muddle in my experience. Please just add suggestions in the appropriate place thus [suggestion-suggestion-suggestion]. 7. I have not yet attempted the formal questions. These can follow (although some of them defy coherent answering) when we have consolidated our position. James Caird 18/09/09 ANNEX A: Planning for the Historic Environment This column is used to reproduce the text of PPS15 with This column is used to set out IHBC concerns. its footnotes. Many issues have been raised by colleagues in the broad terms Proposed amendments to wording are shown by of “...the PPS says little or nothing about...”. Many of these are omissions struck through strictly not entirely true, although there are many places where the appropriate balance may not have been reached, and there additions in red are some fundamental problems that need to be addressed. existing footnotes have been retained with proposed new footnotes (and some references to unresolved matters) in Generally, the issues that have been raised are dealt with in this red column opposite where the issue is dealt with in the PPS. Please use the “find” tool to quickly locate aspects you are Please remember the underlying objective of the PPS: interested in. It is a policy document for the planning system as devolved Apart from the headline issues, concerns are dealt with opposite to LPAs the place in the text that they refer to. In my commentary I It has to follow the principles adopted for the whole suite of have used terms like “strong” and “weak”. We probably need to PPSs omit these in the final submission so as not to arouse adverse It is deliberately short: what is said will be said succinctly reactions. and once It is hoped by addressing the PPS in this way we may influence It presumes guidance will be issued on relevant topics. the outcome satisfactorily. Merely panning the PPS, or commenting in a way that implies that a complete re-write is needed, is unlikely to be influential. I have not attributed to individuals issues raised as many members have had thoughts on similar lines and it would be overly complex to do so. Nevertheless, thanks are due to many of you who contributed. The principal issues are: the need to use terminology that is compatible with the primary legislation. the reinforcement of heritage as a prime component of sustainability. stronger connexion with other planning objectives, such as place-making, regeneration and community development. the need to avoid heritage being seen as an obstruction to climate change mitigation. the need for clear direction to detailed best practice guidance on the full range of heritage topics. INTRODUCTION COMMENTARY 1. Planning policy statements (PPS) set out the Government‟s The reference to Guidance is too limited. LPAs and developers national policies on different aspects of planning in England. need rapid access to appropriate detailed guidance. A full list of This PPS sets out planning policies on the conservation and this should be given in an Annex. Alternatively a reference enhancement of the historic environment through the planning might be made to a full list in the EH Guidance document. system. These policies complement, but do not replace or Either way, clarity is required. override, other national planning policies and should be read in Hence the suggested footnote. conjunction with other relevant statements of national planning policy1. This PPS replaces Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment published in September 1994 and Planning Policy Guidance Note 16: Archaeology and Planning published in November 1990. Guidance to help practitioners implement this policy is provided in the Historic Environment practice guidance2,3. 2. The policies set out in this PPS should be taken into This statement is fine up to a point presupposing: account by regional planning bodies in the preparation of LPAs all have up-to-date LDFs. revisions to regional spatial strategies4, by the Mayor of London Enforcement issues are dealt with adequately in an update 1 They are consistent with our obligations as a signatory to the Council of Europe‟s „Granada‟ Convention (The Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe), „Valetta‟ Convention (The European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage), the „Florence‟ Convention (The European Landscape Convention) and the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention. 2 See www.english-heritage.org.uk/PPS 3 Details of best practice guidance on a range of heritage topics is set out in Annex 2. 4 Following enactment of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill, the responsible regional authorities will be responsible for revision of regional strategy, which will replace the RSS; for reference see footnote 6. in relation to the spatial development strategy for London, and PPS18. by local planning authorities in the preparation of local In reality: development documents. The policies in the final PPS may also it will be many years before all LDFs are fully adopted. be material, depending on the particular circumstances of the case, to decisions on individual planning applications5. most LPAs have not been allowed. This means that the PPS must provide robust heritage policy (and reference to the full range of best practice in its implementation). Specific aspects needing guidance are: ecclesiastical exemption enforcement (including repairs and compulsory purchase) Annex C (a ready reckoner for detailed approach to listed building alterations and additions) listing criteria historic characterisation article 4 directions Conservation area appraisal and management enabling development highways Many/most of these exist and merely need to be adequately signposted. 3. The policies and principles set out in this statement also Enforcement is intended to be dealt with in an enforcement apply to the consideration of the historic environment in relation PPS: hence the footnote. to the other heritage-related consent regimes for which planning authorities are responsible6. 4. Those parts of the historic environment that have PPS15 has a serious shortcoming of terminology which was significance because of their historic, archaeological, introduced to complement the beached, shelved or abandoned 5 This will particularly apply where LPAs have incomplete LDFs and lack saved local development plan heritage policies. 6 Policy on the enforcement of planning control, including listed building and other heritage consents, compulsory purchase and other protective measures is set out in [PPS18]. architectural or artistic interest are called heritage assets. Some Heritage Protection Bill. heritage assets have a level of interest that justifies official The problem is that decisions on planning and related designation (see Annex 1) and particular procedures apply to applications must be taken having regard to the “desirability of development decisions that involve them. This statement also preserving the listed building or its setting or any features of covers heritage assets that are not currently designated or are special architectural or historic interest which it possesses”, in not capable of designation under current heritage protection the case of conservation areas having “regard to the desirability legislation, but which have a level of interest which should be of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that conserved and, where appropriate, enhanced7. area”, and in the case of scheduled monuments having “regard to the desirability of preserving the scheduled monument or its setting”. It is very unclear how the terminology of the PPS (specifically “heritage asset” and “significance”) can be brought into line with these duties. If “heritage asset” is defined as having “historic, archaeological, architectural or artistic interest” how can the evaluation of the significance of the asset be said to equate to “having regard to the desirability of preserving or enhancing features of special architectural or historic interest” only? Clearer definitions are imperative, root and branch consideration by planning lawyers desirable. THE GOVERNMENT’S OBJECTIVES 5. The Government‟s broad aim is that the historic A clear distinction has been made between active policy and environment, and heritage assets in particular, should be objectives. Both are equally important. conserved, enhanced and enjoyed for the quality of life they Here is the first reference to conservation (“conserved”), and by bring to this and future generations. To help achieve this vision, reference to the definition of “conservation” in Annex 1 to the Government‟s objectives for planning for the historic preservation. environment are: 7 The glossary at Annex 1 describes these terms in more detail. The words “aim” and “vision” are both used here under the heading of “objective”. This implies them to be roughly synonymous. to treat heritage protection as a fundamental component of This is the first reference to heritage as a component of sustainability and apply the principles of sustainable sustainable development. It could be stronger and an amended development to proposals involving the historic wording is suggested. environment, by ensuring that policies and decisions concerning the development and use of land take account of The examples only serve to skew the breadth of the concept. the positive benefits of conserving and, where appropriate, They should be omitted. enhancing heritage assets (such as encouraging sustainable tourism to support economic growth or re-using existing heritage assets for example as part of regeneration ) to conserve and, where appropriate, enhance England‟s heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance by ensuring that: decisions are based on an understanding of the nature, extent and level of that significance wherever possible, heritage assets are put to an Appropriate uses for heritage assets. appropriate and viable use that is consistent with their conservation that the positive contribution of such assets to local Heritage assets as a building block for place-making. character and sense of place is recognised and valued and that treatment of the historic environment is integrated Heritage assets as a building block for place-making. into general planning policies, promoting place-making. to contribute to our knowledge and understanding of our Reference to the preservation of heritage resources is needed. past by ensuring that opportunities to preserve and capture Not sure I've got the wording right. evidence from the historic environment and make this publicly available are taken, particularly if a heritage asset is to be lost. PLAN MAKING POLICIES Policy HE1. Evidence base for plan-making HE1.1 Regional and local planning authorities should ensure This is a commitment to the maintenance of HERs as well as the that they have evidence about the historic environment, and adequacy (or appropriateness) of the information base for plan- heritage assets in particular, in their area and that this is making. We may feel it needs strengthening because criticism publicly documented. The evidence should be proportionate and might be levied at a DC where a CC is not maintaining an sufficient to inform adequately the relevant planning process8. adequate record. Local planning authorities should ensure that they either There are issues here for: maintain or have access to a historic environment record.9 the obtaining, storage and use of material under policies HE7, HE8 and HE13. reality of many HERs being partial, out-of-date and less than readily accessible particularly in electronic format. potential very great resource implications if HERs are to be brought up to standard in other than long timescales. Suggestions? HE1.2 This evidence, in particular that contained in relevant This could make a better case for place-making. The historic environment records, should be used to assess the amendments are suggested. extent, significance and condition of known heritage assets and the contribution that they may make to future development in the area the contribution that they could make to the sense of place in future developments. It should also be used to help predict the likelihood that new previously unrecognised heritage assets, particularly sites of historic and archaeological interest, 8 This sentence is very vague. There needs to be much more clarity about what is actually required 9 All local planning authorities currently maintain or have access to a historic environment record (HER) providing coverage of their area. Most HERs are hosted by unitary/upper tier local authorities and National Park Authorities – and in Greater London, by English Heritage. Details can be found at http://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/Gateway/CHR will be discovered, including through the development process. HE1.3 Where planning bodies are addressing the This is a reference to the concept of heritage assets as a conservation of the historic environment they need to consider resource. But it doesn't say that potential heritage assets both known heritage assets and areas where there is a potential (specifically archaeology) should be preserved until they have for such assets to be discovered. Potential areas of heritage been evaluated. assets should remain undisturbed until evaluated. Policy HE2: Regional planning approach HE2.1 The character and significance of the historic This is a reference to landscape characterisation. This needs environment in a region should inform the regional spatial also to be applied to Policy HE3. strategy (RSS)10 with particular attention paid to the landscapes and groupings or types of heritage assets that give distinctive identity to a region or areas within it11. HE2.2 The RSS should ensure a consistent approach across RSSs need to recognise sub-regional differences including both the region to the conservation, enhancement and enjoyment of rural and urban morphologies. the historic environment recognising that within a region there can be a wide range of heritage types and characteristics. HE2.3 In determining its strategy, the regional planning This refers to the right things; regeneration, place-making etc. body should take full account of the positive contribution that but the balance may need addressing. the historic environment can have for regeneration, encouraging In particular there is concern about the last sentence which tourism, and enhancing the quality of the environment and the could be detrimental to heritage assets in supposedly region‟s sense of place, alongside other objectives such as unsustainable locations. economic growth and housing supply. Their approach should be consistent with securing progress against the UK‟s carbon On the other hand, at regional level not much damage could be emissions targets12. done by this. 10 References in this paragraph to the regional spatial strategy should be taken to refer to the regional strategy once the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill is enacted and brought into force. The latest version of the Bill can be found at http://services.parliament.uk.bills/ 11 Historic characterisation provides a useful approach for assimilating this information. This should also be used at local level under Policy HE3. 12 Need to avoid an urban bias: reword? Or omit? Policy HE3: Local planning approach HE3.1 Having assessed the evidence, local planning Conservation first, but other things mentioned. Reference to authorities should, where appropriate, set out a positive, place-making. proactive, strategy for the conservation, enhancement, Where appropriate is unnecessary (when would this be management and enjoyment of the historic environment in their inappropriate?) area. They should particularly focus on the local distinctiveness of the historic environment and how this can be used to Management needs to be added to the list of issues. promote a sense of place13. They should include consideration of how best to conserve individual, groups or types of heritage assets that are most at risk of loss through neglect, decay or other pressures (See also policy HE6.1). HE3.2 Within the plan-making process, the historic Need to get in wider sustainability and regeneration issues here. environment should be seen as a positive contributor to Larger developments such as housing should be referred to. regeneration and sustainable development and a stimulus to inspire new buildings and larger developments of imaginative Conservation areas are required to be preserved and enhanced. and high quality design that respect and harmonise with respond and refer to their their setting and help to preserve or enhance the appearance and character of an area. Policy HE4: Heritage assets and sustainable development HE4.1 The continued use of heritage assets can contributes This is the headline statement about the contribution of heritage to sustainable development. Keeping assets in use reduces the to sustainability. consumption of building materials and energy and reduces Perhaps “can” could be strengthened. Omitting it would do this. waste. HE4.2 Local planning authorities should contribute to The important issues here are mitigating, or adapting to, the effects of climate change when devising policies and making decisions relating to heritage assets by seeking to reuse and, where appropriate, modify 13 LPAs have a duty to consider whether to designate areas as conservation areas. heritage assets so as to reduce CO2 emissions and secure sustainable development. While there may be occasions when climate change objectives conflict with conservation of heritage assets there will normally be opportunities for enhanced energy efficiency, improved resilience to weather, greater use of renewable energy, or sustainable drainage and use of water, that will make a contribution without such conflict arising the significance of the heritage asset being diminished14. Policy HE5: Permitted development and article 4 directions HE5.1 Local planning authorities should consider whether This implies that it is acceptable to have an article 4 direction allowing the exercise of permitted development rights would applying generally in an LPA's area. Is this intended? undermine the aims for the historic environment within the development plan or the general aims of conservation and enhancement set out in this planning policy statement. If so, they should consider the use of an article 4 direction for a single heritage asset, class of heritage assets or an area to limit the extent of such development15. Policy HE6: Monitoring indicators HE6.1 Local planning authorities should consider how they This policy needs to refer to the wider panoply of possible can best proactively monitor the impact of their planning interventions. policies and decisions on the historic environment. They should It is not clear that the costs associated with this Policy are pay particular attention to the degree to which groups of covered in the impact statement at Annex B, although little heritage assets and individual heritage assets are at risk of loss additional cost is caused by this specific Policy. or decay, how they expect this will change over time, and how they propose to respond. Consideration should be given in their Annual Monitoring Report to their statutory duties16 and to 14 Part L of the Building Regulations provides a procedure for determining appropriate levels of 15 Refer to specific guidance 16 The local planning authority has a duty to consider conservation area designation and proposals for enhancement pursuant to ss69 and ??? of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. buildings and areas at risk and the use of compulsory purchase and repairs powers17. DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PROCESS Policy HE7: Pre-application discussions and assessment HE7.1 PPS118 says that local planning authorities and This is in line with the advice on pre-application advice applicants should consider the benefits of early engagement in generally. pre-application discussions. Early engagement is particularly beneficial for applications with the potential to impact on heritage assets or their setting: understanding the significance of affected heritage assets is key to successful design (design that uses the advantages of the asset‟s interest, whilst conserving its significance). The more the applicant and the local planning authority explore and understand that significance before designs are drawn up, the greater the chances of a successful application. HE7.2 Where a development site includes heritage assets This Policy is pretty much current policy. with an archaeological interest, local planning authorities should A potential problem arises from the last sentence. If planning require developers to carry out appropriate desk-based or field permission is refused, developers will not wish to see their evaluations as part of any application for consent. They should studies used by others in pursuit of alternative proposals. A refer to the results of these evaluations when determining the modification is indicated. design of the proposed development. A copy of the outcomes of such evaluations should be deposited in the relevant historic environment record once the development is commenced or abandoned. HE7.3 A heritage asset can be better conserved and the This seems sound, but the final sentence is important to guard 17 Refer to specific guidance 18 Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development (ODPM 2005) p4 para 12. burden of the consent process lessened or even removed if against changes of mind following site evaluation or intervention through the use of pre-application discussions an owner and the by EH. local planning authority can agree the nature and extent of the significance of the asset. There is no obligation on either party to do so but the benefits should be considered by both parties. Policy HE8: Information requirements for validation of applications for consent affecting heritage assets HE8.1 Local planning authorities should require the applicant There is no mention of Design and Access Statements which are to provide a description of the significance of the heritage the proper vehicle for assessing response to context. assets affected and the contribution of their setting to that significance. This is best done in the Design and Access Statement and should set out the information that has been considered and the expertise that has been consulted. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record should have been consulted and the assets themselves should have been assessed19. HE8.2 Local planning authorities should consider the Design and Access Statements should also report on the evidence provided by that description alongside the outcome of outcome of any consultation undertaken by the developer. any consultation with the local community and expert advice Not sure whether this needs to be stated here. from professional experts and/or statutory consultees as required. (This should include the results of any desk-based or field evaluations undertaken by the developer as set out in HE7.2 above.) HE8.3 Local planning authorities should not validate This implies that the normal process of validation, by clerical applications for consent where the extent of the impact of the staff, is inadequate. It also implies that all the necessary proposed development on the significance of any heritage information is available. Not all HERs will provide this. Need it assets or its setting affected cannot be fully understood from be more specific? A footnote is suggested. the application and supporting documents20. 19 Advice on the scope of heritage statements is included in CLG‟s guidance on the validation of planning applications, available at http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/validationplanningapplications. At the time of publication (summer 09) this guidance was likely to be updated; please ensure you refer to the most up-to-date version. 20 The adequacy of the submitted information should be assessed by a suitably qualified person. Policy HE9: Policy principles guiding the determination of applications for development relating to all heritage assets HE9.0 In determining individual applications, local planning This re-ordering and amendment is suggested. It is important authorities should take into account the desirability of to have this fundamental statement about principles first and to enhancing the significance of heritage assets, securing their ensure that the requirements of the legislation are reflected. conservation for the longer term and utilising their positive role in place-making. In particular they must: when deciding an application for development consent which affects a listed building or its setting, the decision-maker must have regard to the desirability of preserving the listed building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. when deciding an application for development consent in a conservation area, the decision maker must have regard to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area. when deciding an application for development consent which affects or is likely to affect a scheduled monument or its setting, the decision-maker must have regard to the desirability of preserving the scheduled monument or its setting. HE9.1 In considering applications21 local planning authorities The meaning of the last sentence is not clear. It is vague but should seek to identify and assess the significance of any could be taken to mean that proposals have some kind of element of the historic environment that may be affected by the precedence over significance. “Understanding” a conflict of relevant development (including development within the setting interest does not resolve it. It isn't really needed as the of an asset) drawing on the evidence provided by any relevant balancing of these issues is an intrinsic part of the process. designation records, the relevant historic environment record, Omission is suggested. the heritage assets themselves and the outcome of 21 This may relate to an application for planning permission, Listed Building Consent, Conservation Area Consent or any other necessary consent for development. consultations with interested parties and specialist advice. In considering the significance of a heritage asset, local planning authorities should take into account the particular nature of the interest in the asset and the value that it holds for this and future generations. This understanding should be used to avoid or minimise conflict between conservation of that significance and proposals for development. HE9.2 Local planning authorities should use appropriately Distinction may need to be made about the skill sets required qualified expert advice to inform decision-making relating to (e.g. building conservation, archaeology). Does “appropriate” heritage assets where the need to understand the significance cover this adequately? The amendment is suggested. of the heritage asset demands it. This may be from in-house experts, experts available through agreement with other authorities, or consultants, complemented by specialist national organisations and local amenity societies. HE9.3 Local planning authorities should particularly seek the views of the local community where the evidence suggests that the asset may have a historic, archaeological, architectural or artistic significance to the local community that may not be fully understood from records or statutory consultees alone22. [HE9.4 In determining individual applications, local planning “Take into account” is weak compared to the statutory “have authorities should take into account have special regard to the special regard”. This needs a major rewording to bring it into desirability of enhancing the significance of heritage assets, line with statutory duties. securing their conservation for the longer term and utilising A compromise with footnote is suggested. their positive role in place-making23.] (see possible alternative at HE9.0) Alternatively, as this is a core Policy, perhaps it should appear as HE9.1 and use the full forms of words required by statute. This is shown as an alternative at HE9.0 HE9.5 Where development proposals that are promoted for This Policy is unacceptable. It implies, in combination with their contribution to mitigating climate change have a Policies 9.7 and 9.8, that,where no similar mitigation is possible, 22 Annex 1 provides an explanation of the different types of significance a heritage asset may have. 23 The wording in Policy 9.4 is intended to be a short policy paraphrase of the various statutory obligations on decision makers. Statutory decisions on applications for the various types of heritage consent must be made in accordance with the forms of words used in the statutes. potentially negative effect on heritage assets, local planning heritage assets are secondary and sacrificial. It also implies authorities should, prior to determination, and ideally during that similarity of outcome is possible regardless of the nature of pre-application discussions, help the applicant to identify the proposal. feasible solutions that deliver similar alternative climate change An amendment is suggested. mitigation but without less harming to the significance of heritage assets and their setting. HE9.6 Local planning authorities should aim to ensure that, The form is weak. It doesn't need both “aim” and “where where reasonably practicable, new developments are designed reasonably practicable”. With the proposed deletion the in a way that respects their setting and reinforces the wording is much stronger. distinctiveness of heritage assets they stand alongside, in terms of scale, height, massing, alignment, and use of materials. In doing so, local planning authorities should, in line with PPS 1, take care to avoid stifling innovation and undermining investment in sustainable development. HE9.7 Where a development proposal has a negative impact on This Policy is unacceptable because it doesn't recognise that the significance of a heritage asset, through alteration or heritage protection is itself a public benefit. The addition of the destruction, or through development within its setting, the local word “other” removes this to an extent. The qualification of this planning authority should weigh the other public benefits of the principle comes in HE9.8 and is maybe the better place to proposed development against any harm it has on the heritage introduce strength. The Guidance says that that in finely asset, recognising that the greater the harm to the significance balanced cases the outcome should favour retention. This is not of a heritage asset the greater the justification will be needed stated here and should be added to HE9.8(iii). for any loss. HE9.8 Local planning authorities should not accept material This qualifies HE9.7. harm to or removal of significance in relation to a heritage asset unless: (i) the harm or partial removal is necessary in This is quite well worded. order to sustain the asset in its original use or, if the original use is not possible, some other sustainable use that conserves the asset (ii) the heritage asset impedes all reasonable Medium term is a weak and undefined term. Long-term would uses of the site, there is clear evidence that no viable use of be better. The word “site” is inappropriate on its own as it the asset or its site24 can be found in the medium long term implies that sites containing assets have to have viability that will enable the retention of the asset‟s significance, and ignoring the presence of the asset. Marketing to test viability is conservation through grant-funding or some form of best practice, hence the proposed footnote. charitable or public ownership is not possible or (iii) it can be demonstrated that the material harm This is unacceptable. Mitigating climate change is a very broad to or removal of significance is heavily outweighed by the and open-ended expression. This should not imply a policy wider social, economic and environmental benefits, including precedence for climate change (or any other) issues. The mitigating climate change, that will be delivered by the addition of the word “heavily” would temper the balance but a proposed development. complete rewording might be needed. HE9.9 Where there has been any deliberate neglect of the This is a useful Policy borrowed from the arrangements for heritage asset in the hope of obtaining consent, local planning Compulsory Purchase compensation. authorities should disregard any deterioration resulting from such neglect when determining consent. HE9.10 Where loss of significance is justified on the merits of The addition is needed to protect against opportunistic new development, local planning authorities should make every demolition in a conservation area. effort to satisfy themselves of the likelihood that the proposed new development will proceed before approving the application and should apply a condition to the approval requiring the loss of significance to occur only in the full implementation of the development. Policy HE10: Additional policy principles guiding the consideration of applications for development related to designated heritage assets HE10.1 Once lost, listed buildings and other heritage assets This is a basic principle which is immediately undermined by the cannot be replaced. Local planning authorities should be guided wording Of HE10.2. It would be useful to strengthen the whole by the principle that the more significant the heritage asset, the suite of Policy here by retaining words from PPG15. greater the presumption in favour of its conservation. 24 See also Policy HE10.3 HE10.2 Material loss of heritage assets of the highest This appears to downgrade the majority of heritage assets. significance, including scheduled ancient monuments25, Combined with Policy HE10.1, it places heritage assets in two protected wreck sites, battlefields, grade I and II* listed distinct divisions in which material loss is “wholly exceptional” buildings and registered parks and gardens, should be wholly and, presumably “not wholly exceptional”. This is The addition exceptional. Material loss of any other heritage asset should is intended to provide a gauge to the hierarchy of significance to not be permitted without careful exploration of alternative ensure that “special regard” is given in all cases. Policy HE10.4 proposals to ensure retention26. is the essential safeguard that allows new development in conservation areas and other cases of heritage asset in which there may not be uniform significance or quality. HE10.3 Local planning authorities considering applications for This is useful explanation. development related to designated heritage assets should be particularly alert to policy 9.8(ii) which sets out the requirement for evidence that alternative ownership or uses for the asset have been explored. To be confident that no appropriate and viable use of the asset can be found, local planning authorities should require evidence that other potential owners or users of the site have been sought through appropriate marketing and that reasonable endeavours have been made to seek grant funding for the asset‟s conservation and to find charitable or public authorities who may be willing to take on the asset. HE10.4 In considering the significance of heritage assets local This is important and well worded as it is it place where we find planning authorities should bear in mind that not all elements of protection for unlisted buildings of significance in conservation a World Heritage Site or Conservation Area will necessarily areas... contribute to its significance. Those elements that do contribute to the significance should be considered as designated assets in themselves (whether subject to separate statutory designation or not). When considering applications for development, local planning authorities should take into account the significance of such individual elements and their contribution to the significance of the World Heritage Site or Conservation Area as 25 Development affecting Scheduled Monuments and Protected Wreck Sites will also require prior consent from the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (see http://www.culture.gov.uk/). In such cases, local planning authorities should encourage applications for all relevant consents to be made in parallel. 26 Decision makers must fulfil their statutory responsibility referred to in Policy HE9.0. a whole. HE10.5 Where an element of a World Heritage Site or ...and the quid pro quo. Conservation Area does not positively contribute to its significance, local planning authorities should take into account the desirability of enhancing or better revealing the significance of the World Heritage Site or Conservation Area, including, where appropriate, through development of that element. This should be seen as a positive public benefit and part of the process of place-making. HE10.6 Due to the discretionary approach taken to the This is the protection for potential archaeological resources in scheduling of monuments and the statutory limitations on what the ground. can be designated as a monument there are many sites that are significant for their archaeological interest that are not designated at present. The absence of designation does not necessarily indicate lower significance. Non-designated assets of archaeological interest equal in significance to that of scheduled monuments should be treated according to the same principles.27. Policy HE11. Additional policy principles guiding the consideration of applications for development affecting the setting of a heritage asset HE11.1 When considering applications for development within This one is tricky because it is about wind turbines. Whilst the the setting of a heritage asset, local planning authorities should setting of some heritage assets is crucial to their significance, treat favourably applications that preserve those elements of the Government will not wish to see alleged adverse effects on the setting that enhance the significance of the asset. When settings being used to heavily restrict the availability of sites. considering applications that do not do this, local planning The issue can probably not be adequately dealt with in policy authorities should weigh any loss of enhancement of the asset but needs well-thought-out guidance against the wider benefits of the application. Reflecting the importance Government attaches to development that 27 Advice and information about the significance of known, but non-designated heritage assets with archaeological interest may be obtained from County Archaeologists and historic environment records, respectively. contributes to the wider principles of sustainable development, such benefits may include the wider benefits associated with increased production of energy from low or zero-carbon sources. The greater the negative impact on the significance of the asset, the greater the benefits that will be needed to justify approval. HE11.2 Where an aspect of an asset‟s setting does not This is the companion Policy to Policy HE10.5. Consistency positively contribute to its significance, local planning authorities would be appropriate: hence the similarity of the wording. should take into account the desirability of enhancing or better revealing the significance, including through high quality design of new development. This should be seen as a positive public benefit and part of the process of place-making. Policy HE12: Additional policy principles guiding development of a heritage asset that is otherwise contrary to the development plan (also known as enabling development) HE12.1 Local planning authorities should use the following This Policy closely follows the Policy in English Heritage's criteria to determine whether the benefits of an application for Enabling Development and the Conservation of Significant enabling development to secure the future conservation of a Places heritage asset outweigh the disbenefits of departing from the Criterion (g) in the EH document is contained in the opening development plan, bearing in mind the requirements of section text here. 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 200428. Will it materially harm the significance of the asset or its setting? Will it avoid detrimental fragmentation of management of the asset? Will it secure the long term future of the asset and, where applicable, its continued use for a purpose sympathetic to 28 Note that these criteria are listed as a starting point; what is a material consideration will always depends on the circumstances of the individual case and this list is not comprehensive. its conservation? Is it necessary to resolve problems arising from the inherent needs of the asset, rather than the circumstances of the present owner, or the purchase price paid? Is there a source of funding that might support the asset without the need for enabling development? Is the level of development the minimum necessary to secure the future conservation of the asset and of the design and type that minimises harm to other public interests? Policy HE13: Policy principles guiding the recording of information related to heritage assets HE13.1 A documentary record of our past is not as valuable Indisputable? as retaining the asset. The ability to record evidence of our past should not therefore be a factor in deciding whether consent for development that would result in a heritage asset‟s destruction should be given. HE13.2 The process of investigating the significance of the This seems ok, but the wording needs to be consistent with historic environment, as part of plan- or decision-making, Policy HE7.2: generates information and furthers understanding of our past. There is a problem here of commercial confidentiality. This information should be made publicly available, including Otherwise an unsuccessful developer could have his expensive through the relevant historic environment record. study made use of by his successor. The words here are ok in principle but we should be aware that others may criticise them. HE13.3 Where a decision has been made that will result in the Recording before loss as a last resort. loss of the whole or a material part of an asset‟s significance, local planning authorities should ensure that developers maximise opportunities to advance understanding of the asset‟s significance before this is lost. Developers should publish the outcomes of such investigations and the advancement in understanding that those results bring. They should deposit copies of the reports with the relevant historic environment record. They should also offer the archive generated to a local museum or other public depository. Where appropriate, local planning authorities should impose planning conditions or obligations to ensure such work is carried out before commencement of the development. ANNEX 1. TERMINOLOGY There is a problem with the terminology because it is incomplete (heritage asset is referred to but not defined) and because it does not resolve the relationship between “significance” and “architectural or historic interest” and the other expressions used in the legislation. Some suggestions are made. The only completely out-of-step aspect is “artistic interest” which only loosely conforms to being described as a component of “historic interest”. Archaeological interest An interest in carrying out an expert investigation at some point in the future into the evidence a place may hold of past human activity. Heritage assets with archaeological interest are the primary source of evidence about the substance and evolution of places, and of the people and cultures that made them. These remains are part of a record of the past that begins with traces of early humans and continues to be created and destroyed. Architectural and artistic interest These are interests in the design and general aesthetics of a Artistic interest sits uncomfortably here as it is sometimes place. They can arise from conscious design or fortuitously from architectural and sometimes not. It needs to be separately the way the place has evolved. More specifically, architectural defined in terms of both architectural and historic interest so interest is an interest in the art or science of the design, when statutory procedures are being undertaken the construction, craftsmanship and decoration of buildings and assessment conforms fully to due process. structures of all types. Artistic interest is an interest in other human creative skill, like sculpture. Architectural interest may include artistic interest. Artistic interest Artistic interest is an interest in other human creative skill, like See comment above. sculpture. Artistic interest may be architectural interest, historic interest or both. Conservation The process of maintaining and managing change to a heritage asset in a way that preserves its significance. Designated asset A World Heritage Site, Scheduled Monument, Listed Building, Protected Wreck Site, Registered Park or Garden, Registered Battlefield or Conservation Area designated as such under the relevant legislation. Heritage asset A building, monument, site, area or landscape of historic, The word “area” is needed to ensure conservation areas fall archaeological, architectural or artistic interest whether within the definition. Non-designated assets are included in the designated or not. Heritage assets are components of the definition. historic environment. Historic environment All aspects of the environment resulting from the interaction between people and places through time, including all surviving physical remains of past human activity, whether visible, buried or submerged, and deliberately planted or managed flora. Those elements of the historic environment that have significance are called heritage assets. Historic environment record (HER) Historic environment records are information services that seek Artefacts need to be included. to provide access to comprehensive and dynamic resources relating to the historic environment of a defined geographic area for public benefit and use. Typically, they comprise databases linked to a geographic information system (GIS), and associated reference material and artefacts, together with a dedicated staffing resource. Historic interest An interest in past lives and events. Heritage assets can The addition is required to insure that all four forms of interest illustrate or be associated with them. Heritage assets with as defined fall within the statutory definition. historic interest not only provide a material record of our nation‟s history, but can also provide an emotional meaning for communities derived from their collective experience of a place and can symbolise wider values such as faith and cultural identity. Historic interest may include archaeological and artistic interest. Historic characterisation Historic characterisation is the process and product of defining the overall historic character of a place or landscape in terms of its present-day archaeological and architectural identity so that the principles of sustainable development can be applied. GIS- based historic landscape characterisation and its urban equivalents are currently the most prevalent of these approaches, but historic environment characterisation extends these principles by combining assessments of archaeological, architectural and historic landscape character, while historic seascape characterisation applies them to the marine historic environment. Setting The area surrounding a heritage asset within which activity or development may affect the significance of that asset. The significance of an asset, or appreciation of that significance, may be enhanced or diminished by elements of the existing setting. Significance The value of a place to this and future generations because of The amendments are needed to ensure a watertight definition in its heritage architectural or historic interest. That interest may line with the primary legislation. As worded there is confusion 29 be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic . The between the terms “historic interest” and “heritage asset”. evaluation of significance is what the decision-maker does when: in the case of a listed building or its setting, the decision- maker has regard to the desirability of preserving the listed building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. in the case of a conservation area, the decision maker has regard to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the 29 The accompanying guidance by English Heritage (http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/PPS) expands on how one can analyse the public‟s interest in heritage assets by sub-dividing it into aesthetic, evidential, historic and communal values. This is not policy, but a tool to aid analysis. character or appearance of that area. in the case of a scheduled monument or its setting, the decision-maker has regard to the desirability of preserving the scheduled monument or its setting.