11/04/2016. NPPF Paragraph 128. NPPF Paragraph 128. NPPF Paragraph 128. NPPF Paragraph 128. NPPF Paragraph 128

Transcription

1 Good practice in the preparation and understanding of NPPF-compliant heritage assessments/statements Stephen Bond, Heritage Places 1

2 NPPF Paragraphs : Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss 134: Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal 135: In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly non designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset. HE Good Practice Advice in Planning: 2 - Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment Where the proposal is likely to affect the significance of heritage assets, applicants are encouraged to consider that significance at an early stage and to take their own expert advice, and then to engage in pre-application discussion with the local planning authority and their heritage advisers to ensure that any issues can be identified and appropriately addressed. As part of this process, these discussions and subsequent applications usually benefit from a structured approach to the assembly and analysis of relevant information. The stages below indicate the order in which this process can be approached [HEGPA 2, paragraph 6] HE Good Practice Advice in Planning: 2 - Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment Understand the significance of the affected assets Understand the impact of the proposal on that significance Avoid, minimise and mitigate impact in a way that meets the objectives of the NPPF Look for opportunities to better reveal or enhance significance Justify any harmful impacts in terms of the sustainable development objective of conserving significance and the need for change. Offset negative impacts on aspects of significance by enhancing others through recording, disseminating and archiving archaeological and historical interest of the important elements of the heritage assets affected. [HEGPA 2, paragraph 6] Issues to be Addressed in Preparing the NPPF Heritage Statement 1: Establish which heritage assets could be affected by the development proposal, firstly on the application site and then in the wider historic environment 2: Assess and quantify their significance 3: Identify and consider the setting of each, assessing the contribution that it makes to the significance of the heritage asset 4: Assess and quantify the likely effects of the development (beneficial or harmful) on the significance of every potential heritage asset receptor, taking into account planned and further possible mitigation/enhancement 5: Provide clear and convincing justification for any harm to significance however slight and whether through direct physical impact or by change to the setting [wording from Historic England website NPPF and Heritage Assets page]. 1: Identifying Assets at Risk of Impacts From a heritage perspective, the built environment divides into two groups: Heritage assets (which may be designated or non-designated), and, Ordinary assets Heritage assets are distinguished from other components of the environment (ordinary assets) by the meaning for society that a heritage asset holds over and above its functional utility. [English Heritage (2008) Conservation Principles ]. Both designated (World Heritage Sites, Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, Protected Wreck Sites, Registered Parks and Gardens, Registered Battlefields or Conservation Areas) and non-designated heritage assets need to be covered in the NPPF-compliant heritage statement. 2

3 2: Assessing and Quantifying Significance 3

4 4

5 5

6 6

7 Research topics 19th century hotels 19th century tourism Etched glass and pub interiors GWR Development of Naval College at Dartmouth Gas, electricity and lighting Levels of significance Significance needs to be quantified. Various hierarchies exist, for instance: Design Manual for Roads and Bridges [DMRB] English Heritage (2011) Seeing the History in the View (pg 20, Table 1) ICOMOS (2011) Guidance on Heritage Impact Assessments for Cultural World Heritage Properties (Appendix 3A) Tailor made for the particular statement Level of Significance Very high High Medium Low Negligible Criteria World Heritage Sites. Assets of acknowledged international importance. Scheduled Monuments and undesignated assets of Schedulable quality and importance. Grade I and II* Listed buildings (Scotland category A). Other Listed buildings that can be shown to have exceptional qualities in their fabric or associations not adequately reflected in their Listing grade. Conservation Areas containing very important buildings. Undesignated structures of clear national importance. Designated or undesignated assets that contribute to regional research objectives Grade II (Scotland category B) Listed buildings. Historic (unlisted) buildings that can be shown to have exceptional qualities in their fabric or historical association. Conservation Areas containing important buildings that contribute significantly to their historic character. Designated and undesignated assets of local importance including those compromised by poor preservation and/or poor survival of contextual associations. Assets of limited value, but with potential to contribute to local research objectives. Assets with very little or no surviving archaeological interest. Buildings of no architectural or historical note and buildings of an intrusive character. Landscapes with little or no significant historical interest. 3: Settings and Their Contribution to Significance NPPF: Definition of Setting 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. 7

8 Heritage Value 11/04/2016 HE Good Practice Advice in Planning: 3 The Setting of Heritage Assets Step 1: identify which heritage assets and their settings are affected Step 2: assess whether, how and to what degree these settings make a contribution to the significance of the heritage asset(s) Step 3: assess the effects of the proposed development, whether beneficial or harmful, on that significance Step 4: explore the way to maximise enhancement and avoid or minimise harm Step 5: make and document the decision and monitor outcomes [HEGPA 3, paragraph 12] 4: Assessing and Quantifying Impacts and Effects Levels of significance Both the magnitude of impacts and of cumulative effect on receptor assets need to be quantified. Various methodologies exist, for instance: Design Manual for Roads and Bridges [DMRB] English Heritage (2011) Seeing the History in the View (Table 3/4 and 5) ICOMOS (2011) Guidance on Heritage Impact Assessments for Cultural World Heritage Properties (Appendix 3B and Table 5.8 in main text) Tailor made for the particular statement DMRB Magnitude of Impact Table Major Change to key historic building elements, such that the asset is totally altered Comprehensive change to the setting. Moderate Change to many key historic building elements, such as the asset is significantly modified. Changes to setting of an historic building, such that it is significantly modified. Minor Changes to key historic building elements, such that the asset is slightly different. Changes to setting of an historic building, such that it is noticeably changed. Negligible No Change Slight changes to historic building elements or setting that hardly affect it. No change to fabric or setting. DMRB Significance of Effects Matrix Very High Neutral Slight Moderate / Large or very Very large large Large High Neutral Slight Moderate / Moderate / Large / very slight large large Medium Neutral Neutral / Slight Moderate Moderate / Slight large Slight Low Neutral Neutral / Neutral / Slight / slight Slight moderate Slight Negligible Neutral Neutral Neutral / Neutral / Slight Slight No Change Negligible Minor Moderate Major Magnitude of Impact 8

9 NPPF Paragraphs : Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss 134: Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal 135: In weighing applications that affect directly or indirectly non designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset. 5: Justifying Harm Historic England Website - National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and Heritage Assets All grades of harm, including total destruction, minor physical harm and harm through change to the setting, can be justified on the grounds of public benefits that outweigh that harm taking account of the great weight to be given to conservation and provided the justification is clear and convincing. 9

10 Substantial or Less Than Substantial Harm? In general terms, substantial harm is a high test, so it may not arise in many cases It is the degree of harm to the asset s significance rather than the scale of the development that is to be assessed. The harm may arise from works to the asset or from development within its setting. Planning Practice Guidance Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment (2014) What the inspector was saying was that for harm to be substantial, the impact on significance was required to be serious such that very much, if not all, of the significance was drained away One was looking for an impact which would have such a serious impact on the significance of the asset that its significance was either vitiated altogether or very much reduced. Bedford Borough Council v Secretary of State for CLG, 2013 on the other hand Substantial or Less Than Substantial Harm? Less than substantial harm does not equate to a less than substantial planning objection there is a need to give considerable importance and weight to any harm when carrying out the planning balance. Barnwell Manor Wind Energy Ltd v E.Northants DC, English Heritage, National Trust & SSCLG, June 2014 Then again! An adverse impact [on significance]...is one factor that attracts considerable importance and weight in the balancing exercise. However, it is important to acknowledge that considerable importance and weight is not synonymous with overriding importance and weight the provision of [housing] and the associated economic activity are very weighty matters in economic and social terms. Recovered appeal: land at Razor s Farm, Chineham, Basingstoke, September 2014 Public Benefits Public benefits should flow from the proposed development. They should be of a nature or scale to be of benefit to the public at large and should not just be a private benefit Public benefits may include heritage benefits, such as: Sustaining or enhancing the significance of a heritage asset and the contribution of its setting Reducing or removing risks to a heritage asset Securing the optimum viable use of a heritage asset in support of its long term conservation. Planning Practice Guidance Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment (2014) Content of Compliant Heritage Statement 1 Introduction purpose, background, stages to process, constraints in version, authorship, road map to content Introduction to the site location, geology, designations etc Introduction to the wider area/settlement etc If application site includes heritage asset(s), develop understanding of asset(s), including development history, identification of setting, views [NB if not, omit this section] Identify all potentially affected heritage assets in wider environs of site, separating them into designated and non-designated assets, and develop proportionate understanding of each, including designation (if any), history, setting, views etc Content of Compliant Heritage Statement 2 If archaeology is to be integrated with built/cultural heritage, baseline assessment of archaeology in accordance with IFA guidelines to be inserted Assess and quantify significance of every potentially affected heritage asset, set out in order: designated asset(s) within site; non-designated asset(s) within site; designated asset(s) whose setting will be affected by proposals; non-designated asset(s) whose setting will be affected by proposals Describe and quantify contribution made by the setting to each asset s significance Define national and local legislative and policy context Assess and quantify magnitude of impacts on each asset or asset s setting in same order as above Content of Compliant Heritage Statement 3 Assess and quantify the significance of effects of impacts (harm) on each asset or asset s setting in same order as above Consider and discuss whether any harm amounts to substantial and, if less that substantial, consider how far below the threshold it falls Identify potential further mitigation measures that might be implemented to reduce the level of harm, where appropriate Identify potential further enhancement measures Where harm to significance remains, set out convincing justification in terms of accruing public benefits to satisfy NPPF paragraphs 133 and/or 134 and/or 135 Summary 10

11 11