Planning Policy Statement 5

Planning for the Historic Environment

Richard Morrice


	Air photograph of Battlesbury hillfort: heritage assets of archaeological interest form ‘part of a record of the past that begins with traces of early humans and continues to be created and destroyed’. (Photo: English Heritage/NMR)

The government’s new statement on planning policy, PPS5 ‘Planning for the Historic Environment’, has now been in use for several months. It became a material consideration on 23 March 2010 when it replaced the two separate ‘planning policy guidance’ documents PPG15 and PPG16. These PPGs had become respected parts of the planning landscape, thoroughly familiar to all with an interest in the conservation of the historic environment. This article outlines the provisions of the PPS, particularly in relation to the PPGs it replaces.

BACKGROUND

While PPG16: Archaeology and Planning was the first statement of government policy on the preservation of archaeological remains on land, PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment was the successor to a number of government circulars. The flurry of legislative activity during the 1960s and ’70s had resulted in a variety of circulars covering historic buildings and conservation areas which was then rounded up and consolidated in Department of the Environment Circular 23/77: Historic Buildings and Conservation Areas – Policies and Procedures, which was itself then revised to become DoE Circular 8/87, with the same title.

PPG15 was something of a departure because it was not a circular giving information and directions on legislative or procedural matters but a statement of policy and guidance. As such, it can be characterised as containing not only policy and guidance, but also legislative explanation, philosophical reflections and advice on many matters relating to historic buildings and conservation areas. So, when government decided to reduce planning policy statements simply to policy on the planning system, it was obvious that the lengthy PPG15, and the rather briefer PPG16, would need considerable revision, if not reduction in length.

The result is a much briefer document devoted to the government’s planning policy on the historic environment, outlining the things that local planning authorities (LPAs) are obliged to do: the ‘shoulds’ and ‘musts’, as it were. The guidance function is not lost, however, as the new policy statement is accompanied by a web-based guidance document, PPS5: Planning for the Historic Environment: Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide, which is intended ‘to assist local authorities, owners, applicants and other interested parties in implementing PPS5’ and ‘to help in the interpretation of policies within the PPS’. The Practice Guide does not ‘constitute a statement of government policy itself’, though it may also be material to individual planning and heritage consent decisions (see paragraph 2). Instead, here can be found guidance in many ways similar to sections of PPGs 15 and 16: the ‘mays’ and ‘mights’ rather than the ‘shoulds’ and ‘musts’.

TERMINOLOGY

At the heart of PPS5 is the concept of conservation. As the first section of PPS5 explains, ‘the Government’s overarching aim is that the historic environment and its heritage assets should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life they bring to this and future generations’. This key term is not new, but the definition used here is, and it introduces some important terminology not found in the PPGs: Conservation – the process of maintaining and managing a ‘heritage asset’ in a way that sustains and where appropriate enhances its ‘significance’.

PPS5 takes a post-Heritage Protection White Paper view of the historic environment as a continuum, rather than as a category broken up into small sections by type of asset or differing legislation. This view is embedded in the terminology used. PPS5 applies to the whole historic environment, defined as ‘all aspects of the environment resulting from the interaction between people and places through time, including all surviving physical remains of past human activity’. As this definition is obviously very wide, it is refined to introduce the holistic concept of the heritage asset, with no distinction between ‘a building, monument, site, place, area or landscape’, whether on land or under the sea. It is simply defined as having ‘a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions’.

Ornate column capitals, densely decorated plasterwork and richly patterned stained glass adorn Brighton's Middle Street Synagogue

Middle Street Synagogue, Brighton: in defining ‘historic interest’ PPS5 (Annex 2) notes that ‘heritage assets with 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’. (Photo: English Heritage)

Such heritage assets are then refined further to highlight designated heritage assets, and assets identified by the local planning authority during the process of decision-making or through the plan-making process (including local listing). Designated assets include not only scheduled monuments, listed buildings and conservation areas but also WHS, Protected Wreck Sites, Registered Parks and Gardens and Registered Battlefields.

It is important to emphasise that PPS5 is in many ways sequential; one consideration follows on from another. Thus ‘historic environment’ is refined down to ‘heritage asset’ and then to ‘designated heritage asset’. Designation reflects an increase in significance, defined under the heading Terminology (PPS 5, Annex 2) as follows: significance is ‘the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic'.

archaeological interest relates to the ‘evidence a heritage asset 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.’
architectural and artistic interest concerns ‘the design and general aesthetics of a place’ whether consciously designed or an accident of its evolution
historic interest arises from the material record of our nation’s history and concerns the illustration of or association with ‘past lives and events’.

This approach therefore follows the draft Heritage Protection Bill in defining interest, but the definition is in no sense incompatible with those of the 1979 and 1990 Acts): rather it is more complete and explicit, as well as simpler (thereby meeting the increasing need for transparency in process terms).

KEY CONCEPTS

PPS5 is self-explanatory, particularly when read with the Practice Guide; it also follows on and up-dates thinking from both PPG15 and 16. The following notes expand on themes from both the PPS and the Practice Guide.

All heritage assets, not just designated ones
As not all archaeological sites of importance have been researched sufficiently for them to be protected by scheduling, one of PPG16’s main innovations was to provide a mechanism for dealing with unscheduled archaeology through the planning system. PPS5 goes further by bringing other undesignated heritage assets under the same umbrella. This builds on past practice by numbers of LPAs which have created local lists for the protection of locally significant historic buildings, on the encouragement of local protection in the Heritage Protection White Paper, and on the current localism agenda. Some heritage assets which are not nationally designated (such as a building which is not listed, scheduled or in a conservation area, or a garden which is not registered) have nevertheless sufficient heritage significance to justify taking that significance into account where, for example, an application for planning permission is being considered.

Proportionality
Attendant to what might appear to be a great widening out of the historic environment potentially capable of protection through the planning system, is proportionality. PPS5 is at pains to point out that the protection of a heritage asset, whether nationally designated or not, should be strictly proportionate to its significance. This is explained most explicitly in the section on the government’s objectives (paragraphs 5-7), the second of which is ‘to conserve England’s heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance’. Proportionality is underlined in Policy HE 9.1 which states that ‘substantial harm to or loss of any Grade II listed building, park or garden should be exceptional’ but that ‘substantial harm to or loss of designated heritage assets of the highest significance… should be wholly exceptional’.

Proportionality applies to process as well as consent. The level of detail of evidence about the historic environment and heritage assets which needs to be provided in terms of both the plan-making process (Policy HE 2.1) and in decision-making (Policy HE6.1) must be proportionate and no more than is sufficient to a full understanding of significance.

Identifying significance
The need to evaluate and understand the significance of heritage assets is key to the success of PPS5, and the policy returns to the issue regularly. It places emphasis on the evidence base in plan-making (Policies HE 2 and HE 3) and on information requirements (HE 6). It also emphasises the need for local planning authorities to ‘identify and assess the particular significance of any element of the historic environment that may be affected by the relevant proposal (including by development affecting the setting of a heritage asset)’ (HE 7.1). This is then elaborated in Policy HE 7.2: ‘In considering the impact of a proposal on any heritage asset, local planning authorities should take into account the particular nature of the heritage asset and the value that it holds for this and future generations. This understanding should be used by the local planning authority to avoid or minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposals.’

Then in Policy HE 7.4: ‘Local planning authorities should take into account:

the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets, and of utilising their positive role in place-shaping; and
the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets and the historic environment generally can make to the establishment and maintenance of sustainable communities and economic vitality by virtue of the factors set out in HE 3.1.’


Lancaster House, Manchester built for Lloyd’s Packing Warehouses Ltd in 1907-10: heritage protection is designed to control change not to prevent it. The recent urban regeneration of central Manchester has been heavily reliant on the conversion of warehouses and other buildings associated with the city’s industrial past. (Photo: English Heritage)

Policy HE 3.1 is a particularly useful statement of the contribution made by the historic environment and individual heritage assets. These benefits need to be taken into account in plan-making, which is why they are first mentioned in Policy HE 3.1, but they are also important in terms of the balance between benefit and significance in decision-making, as mentioned above. So they are referred to again in Policy HE 7.4, a reminder that while new development may offer positive benefits, the historic environment is also likely to offer benefits beyond heritage ones.

Substantial harm
The PPS divides decisions between those which would lead to ‘substantial harm to or loss of significance’ (Policy HE 9.2) and those where there is ‘less than substantial harm’ (Policy HE 9.4). Policy HE 9.2 elaborates carefully on the assessments needed against which applications should be judged, and there is further guidance, particularly on the concept of optimum viable use, in the Practice Guide (paragraphs 87-90). Minor harm is also discussed there (paragraph 87).

No definition is given of what substantial means in qualifying harm (as in ‘substantial harm’ and ‘less than substantial harm’). However, elucidation of PPS5, Policy HE 9 has recently been made. This states that, it is ‘English Heritage’s understanding that in applying policies in HE 9.1 to HE 9.4 and HE 10 to buildings in a conservation area that make a contribution to the area’s significance, it is appropriate to apply those policies to the impact of the proposals on the individual building. Substantial harm to or total loss of significance of such a building would therefore be considered against the policy tests in HE 9.2, taking into account the relative significance of the building affected and its contribution to the area as a whole when giving the harm or loss appropriate weight. The same approach applies to buildings that make a contribution to the significance of a World Heritage Site’.(1)

The role of the local authority
PPS5 describes a system largely operated by local planning authorities. It therefore explains the government’s objectives for the historic environment, not how local planning authorities should do it. This is where the Practice Guide helps. In carrying out its obligations under the Acts and PPS5, local planning authorities can implement government policy in other ways than those described in the Practice Guide, according to local need. As it points out (paragraph 2): ‘Alternative approaches may be equally acceptable, provided they are compliant with the national policies and objectives, clearly justified, transparently presented and robustly evidenced’. Local planning authorities can therefore carry out their obligations in different ways, but if they do so, they need to explain how they do it.

The Practice Guide gives guidance on a wide spectrum of topics, particularly in terms of plan-making and development management, including:

historic environment records – paras 28-32 (HE 2)
historic landscapes - paras 38-40 (HE 3)
heritage partnership agreements – para 67
expert advice – paras 74-75 (HE 7)
new development: design in context – paras 80-81 (HE 7)
optimum viable use – paras 87-90 (HE 9)
marketing to demonstrate redundancy – para 96 (HE 9)
non-designated sites of archaeological interest – para 109 (HE 9)
statutory decision-making requirements – paras 110-112 (HE 9)
setting – paras 113-124 (HE 10)
written schemes of investigation – paras 134-138 (HE 12).

PPG15 v PPS5: OTHER KEY DIFFERENCES

There has been some concern that the changes in language and terminology in PPS5 have somehow changed the policy landscape; that what had been for more than three decades clearly understood as the main questions to be asked in any particular case had somehow changed fundamentally. This is to misunderstand the policy background. PPG15 implicitly explained, perhaps not always very clearly, that decisions about development in the historic environment are a matter of balance between the wider benefit which accrues from a proposal and the significance of the heritage asset which is affected. (In the case of PPG15 this is largely confined to listed buildings and conservation areas.) The existence of this balance or equation is made much clearer in PPS5.

The emphasis on proportionality (HE 9.1) has also attracted some comment, but the concept is not new, and it is implicit in PPG15 (‘the demolition of any Grade I or Grade II* building should be wholly exceptional and should require the strongest justification’ – para 3.17).

Practical advice – Annex C of PPG15
Part 6 of the Practice Guide, ‘Further Guidance on Making Changes to Heritage Assets’ provides practical guidance on conservation. This function is derived from the Technical Digest on Alterations to Listed Buildings, originally written as Appendix IV of DoE Circular 23/77, repeated in 8/87, and latterly reproduced in an edited form (omitting material on individual building types) as Annex C of PPG15. However, Part 6 is shorter and radically different in its approach.

Appendix IV of Circular 23/77 was very much of its time. Written as a government technical statement towards the end of what has been called ‘The Heroic Age of Conservation’, during the first stage of the Listing Resurvey and following much legislative change, it indicated a concern that local planning authorities might be unaware of the fact that conservation is a matter of detail, as much as a concern for the wider picture. It therefore contained numerous lists of building features which should be retained unaffected during works which would otherwise change a building.

Annex C of PPG15 continued this approach, providing guidance on changes to listed buildings and by extension was applicable to individual buildings in conservation areas. However, it did not cover wider changes to conservation areas, particularly to public realm and highways, some guidance on which was contained in the main PPG. And, of course, there was very little on parks and gardens in PPG15, nor on standing and buried remains or other archaeological sites, whether scheduled or not, in PPG16.


	The Grade I listed Manor Farmhouse in Frampton on Severn, Gloucestershire, ticks many of the significance ‘boxes’: traditionally the birthplace of ‘The Fair Rosamund’, mistress of Henry II and an important figure in English folklore, the building includes many 15th and 16th century elements, as well as being intimately bound up with our agricultural history.

While conservation remains a matter of detail, and fabric remains crucially important, Part 6 of the Practice Guide is more of a general introduction to conservation of heritage assets during change than a technical digest (though para 179 points to the importance of fabric as part of an asset’s significance, and para 182 to the importance of its features). Indeed, PPS5 follows English Heritage’s Conservation Principles in highlighting the need for significance in all its forms to be conserved, and Part 6 clearly reflects that concern.

The Practice Guide could have adopted a more utilitarian view, that changes to listed buildings and conservation areas greatly outnumber those to standing and buried remains and therefore should be given some advantage, but the latter are among the most precious relics of our historic environment and some mention is clearly necessary. That said, listed buildings and buildings in conservation areas are the most often changed, and the balance of guidance in Part 6 reflects that.

Sustainability
PPS5 is, like all Planning Policy Statements, subordinate to PPS1: Delivering a Sustainable Environment. Policy HE 7.5 underlines the fact that PPS5 is therefore subordinate to the requirements in PPS1 for the planning system to protect and enhance the historic environment and to ensure high quality development.(2) Thus, notwithstanding the South Lakeland decision and others, ‘local planning authorities should take into account the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to the character and local distinctiveness of the historic environment’.

Other omissions?
So what of the material in earlier PPGs is not covered in PPS5? Omissions largely concern matters which are not planning policy. Enforcement is a notable absentee, as a matter largely of legislation but it is understood that enforcement in the planning system, including historic environment enforcement, is to be given its own PPS. It should be a major advantage for historic environment enforcement to be part of the wider enforcement landscape. And the law remains in place, of course.

Designation of listed buildings has been covered separately for some time and information on the Principles of Selection and the Selection Guides is now available on the DCMS website, as is material on scheduling monuments and scheduled monument consent.

The Ecclesiastical Exemption and works to places of worship are also now mentioned in separate guidance, particularly on how the exemption should be interpreted by the exempt denominations, and on matters relating to redundant places of worship. New guidance and a new code of practice for the exempt denominations were published on 20 July 2010 and the new order, the secondary legislation which defines the ecclesiastical exemption, came into force on 1 October 2010.

English Heritage is publishing a web-based resource, Heritage Protection in England: A Guide, as an overview of all relevant heritage asset legislation and guidance, due in the autumn. It will also be publishing further guidance on many aspects of the historic environment as time goes on, as well as reviewing older guidance in the light of PPS5.

Notes

(1) Note posted on English Heritage website on 11 July 2010, following discussion with the Department for Communities. The full note can be found at www.englishheritage.org.uk/publications/pps-practiceguide/.

(2) Planning should facilitate and promote sustainable and inclusive patterns of urban and rural development by: making suitable land available for development in line with economic, social and environmental objectives to improve people’s quality of life; contributing to sustainable economic development; protecting and enhancing the natural and historic environment, the quality and character of the countryside, and existing communities; ensuring high quality development through good and inclusive design, and the efficient use of resources; and, ensuring that development supports existing communities and contributes to the creation of safe, sustainable, liveable and mixed communities with good access to jobs and key services for all members of the community. (PPS1, page 7)

The Building Conservation Directory, 2011

Author

DR RICHARD MORRICE is with the Heritage Protection Reform Team at English Heritage.

Further information

Legislation and guidance

Planning