16 / 208
1 4
T H E B U I L D I N G C O N S E R VAT I O N D I R E C T O R Y 2 0 1 5
T W E N T Y S E C O N D E D I T I O N
1
PROFESS IONAL SERV I CES
Historic England (the new name for the
protection arm of English Heritage), Cadw,
Historic Scotland and the Department of
the Environment – the statutory advisors
in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern
Ireland respectively – provide additional
guidance. The various national amenity
societies are also statutory consultees.
CONSERVATION STATEMENTS
AND MANAGEMENT PLANS
Conservation management plans first became
popular in Australia, where they were
developed by the National Trust for New
South Wales in 1982 in response to the Burra
Charter (see Recommended Reading entries
for James Semple Kerr and Kate Clark).
However, they did not become common in
the UK until 1996 when the Heritage Lottery
Fund made them a requirement of lottery
grant aid.
Conservation management plans are a
very useful tool for sustaining and managing
heritage assets. Indeed they ought to be
the starting point for the management
of any complex historic site, building or
landscape. The holistic approach to different
types of significance embedded in these
documents is particularly suited to large
sites with multiple management challenges
and opportunities, and various aspects of
cultural importance. They provide owners
and decision-makers with a balanced
framework which summarises the context,
including both practical issues and heritage
aspects, and contains policies to safely steer
owners, managers and developers away
from the temptation of convenience at the
expense of the heritage values (see Glossary)
that contribute to the site’s significance.
Following a description of the heritage
asset and what is known about its origins,
history and management, the heart
of these documents is the assessment
of significance and the agreement of
conservation management policies
to ensure that this is not diminished
through the process of future change.
Conservation statements also follow this
significance-driven approach and can be a
cost-effective solution for less complicated
sites or where there are no major development
proposals. Unlike conservation management
plans, conservation statements only briefly
consider the current challenges affecting
significance and the potential opportunities
at a site. Moreover, they rarely include
the detailed formulation of conservation
management policies that provide the
conservation framework. They can therefore
allow for a greater degree of flexibility when
considering future options, as rigorous
conservation management policies are neither
appropriate nor especially useful for buildings
where future uses are uncertain. Rigid policies
may result in limitations that would severely
hinder design creativity and options for viable
reuse and stifle potential solutions.
As a management tool, both conservation
management plans and conservation
statements are living documents that should
be revisited as required. It is particularly
important that they are updated following the
implementation of any development proposals
to ensure that they remain relevant, accurate
and effective.
Often the most successful major projects
are those where a conservation management
plan is commissioned at the outset, providing
the strategic background understanding of a
place before informing forward planning and
master planning exercises. One commonly
encountered pitfall occurs when conservation
management plans are commissioned too late
in the process and are expected to meekly
support projects that may be unsuitable.
Another problem is that conservation
statements and management plans are often
seen as one-off documents and do not form
part of the sustainable management strategy
of a site.
Two recent conservation management
plans serve to illustrate the range of challenges
and opportunities presented by different sites.
The late 17th-century Acklam Hall (Grade I)
is set in designed parkland that includes a
scheduled medieval fishpond. The occupant,
Middlesbrough College, was intending to
relocate and the report was prepared to guide
the owners, Middlesbrough Council, with
respect to the future development of the hall
and parkland.
In comparison, at the 19th-century
Ripon Workhouse Museum (Grade II) the
report focussed on the architectural and
social significance of the site, which had
been occupied by a poorhouse since 1776.
Of particular interest are the 1874 vagrants’
cellblock and dormitory. The conservation
management plan identified issues that have
the potential to determine the way in which
the site is managed and the plan provided
invaluable information for the museum’s
extension into additional buildings that were
previously part of the workhouse.
On a smaller scale, a conservation
statement at Lincoln Constitutional
(Conservative) Club guided proposals for
development of this vacant site, which had
fallen into very poor condition. Built in 1895,
this is a Grade II listed building in Lincoln’s
conservation area. It is now a successful
restaurant, bar, nightclub and events venue.
The most successful projects are those
that objectively consider the needs of a place
and engage the expertise and enthusiasm of
multiple stakeholder groups. This ensures
that local expertise informs the process and
that a consensus is achieved with dedicated
personnel, supportive of the plan, in place to
implement the recommendations and guide
change over the long term.
HERITAGE STATEMENTS
In contrast to conservation statements
and plans, which typically shape decisions
at an early stage, heritage statements
(also called heritage impact assessments)
respond to development proposals. They
incorporate a brief summary of a site’s
historical development and a description of
its current character, state of preservation
and significance and then assess the
likely impact of a proposed development
on the significance identified.
They are typically most effective when the
heritage specialists, conservation architects
or planners involved liaise closely with the
project architect and owner and provide
independent objective advice as early in the
process as possible and certainly before a
scheme is finalised on paper.
A heritage statement must be submitted
with any application for listed building
consent, scheduled monument consent or any
application for planning permission involving:
• designated heritage assets such as a
conservation area, world heritage site,
registered battlefield or registered
historic park and garden
• demolition or construction of a new
building within the curtilage of a listed
building or scheduled monument
• demolition of a non-
designated heritage asset
• known archaeological sites.
A well-prepared heritage statement can
make a substantial difference to the outcome
of a proposal. In the case of an electricity
sub-station at Arlington Road, London a
proposal to convert the building to provide
21 apartments was refused consent. The
building is located within, and makes a
positive contribution to, the Camden Town
Conservation Area. While the council
accepted the principle of residential use, it
was concerned about the impact of a roof-
top addition and the design of a prominent
rear elevation. A heritage statement was
subsequently prepared to assess the impact
of the proposal. On appeal, the inspector
concurred with this new evidence and
concluded that the proposal would preserve
the appearance and enhance the character of
the conservation area.
A heritage statement for St John’s
College, Durham formed part of successful
applications to secure planning permission
and listed building consent for the erection
of two accommodation blocks for students.
This sensitive site, which forms part of the
Elaborate plasterwork adorns ceilings at Acklam Hall