Basic HTML Version
24
Historic Gardens 2010
BCD Special Report
Durlston Castle near Swanage in Dorset is a remarkable late 19th century didactic landscape which is included on the
Register at Grade II. A blanket tree preservation order coupled with a raft of natural environment designations has prevented
the appropriate management of trees within the designed landscape leading to the loss and erosion of important designed
views which form part of the special historic interest and character of the site. (Photo: Jonathan Lovie)
encourages local authorities to identify places
which are significant for their communities
within the planning system. In addition to
the base list within the LDF, it is envisaged
that supporting evidence will be gathered
within the county’s Historic Environment
Record (HER), a much expanded form of
the old Sites and Monuments Record. The
HER thus becomes an essential repository
of data to be consulted by anyone with an
interest in the historic environment, and a key
element in the reformed planning system.
There is an increasing number of counties
developing Historic Environment Records
providing on-line resources to owners,
developers and the wider community.
Conservation areas and
designed landscapes
Designed landscapes are often crucial
elements in the historic and aesthetic
interest of a particular locality. It therefore
follows, especially in urban areas, that
many conservation areas will include, or be
closely associated with, a designed landscape.
Examples might include an early 19th
century residential development surrounding
communal gardens or an urban square
(Calverly Park, Tunbridge Wells – Grade II); a
cemetery or burial ground serving a particular
community (Key Hill Cemetery, Birmingham –
Grade II*); or a public park with associated
residential development (Crystal Palace
Park – Grade II*). The same principles of
association will apply equally to nationally
designated designed landscapes, and those
which have been identified on the local lists.
While the connection between designed
landscapes and conservation area designation
is perhaps more frequent and obvious in
the urban context, there are rural situations
where landscape designation and conservation
area designation work together. An 18th or
19th century model village, for example, may
form an integral part of the development
of a designed landscape. In the case of the
Milton Abbas conservation area in Dorset, the
village was designed by Lancelot ‘Capability’
Brown and Sir William Chambers in the
late 18th century, and is integrally linked
to the evolution of the Grade II* designed
landscape associated with Milton Abbey which
is nearby. While the village is not included
within the registered site boundary of the
designated landscape, it forms an essential
element of its setting and features in a key
designed view from within the landscape.
Conservation area designation extends
the scope of protection to include the
demolition of unlisted buildings within
the area through the need for conservation
area consent, and it introduces protection
for trees. Specific alterations to houses
may also be introduced through Article 4
designations. Designation thus offers
greater control over many of the historic
assets comprised within it. It is a locally
accountable and highly democratic designation,
and it is thus a particularly appropriate
tool for seeking the conservation of both
nationally and locally designated designed
landscapes and, crucially, their settings.
It is clear from PPS5 that the
Government’s intention was to promote the
greater use of conservation areas, and from
the perspective of historic designed landscapes,
whether nationally designated or not, this is
very much to be welcomed and encouraged.
Conservation of
historic planting within
designed landscapes
Inclusion of a landscape on the
Register of
Parks and Gardens
does not bring with it
any additional statutory control. It follows,
therefore, that the planning authority does not
acquire any control over changes to historic
planting within that site unless any proposed
change requires planning consent. Thus
it is possible for the owner of a registered
garden, for example, to remove an Arts and
Crafts topiary garden completely, even if
that feature made a significant (or, indeed,
the principal) contribution to the site’s
special historic interest. The only exception
would be if the removal formed part of a
development scheme, or if the site fell within
a conservation area, or the topiary trees
were covered by a tree preservation order.
In this situation, the conservation area
designation offers a much more appropriate
and flexible framework for conservation and
management than the tree preservation order.
The conservation area designation is predicated
on an understanding of those elements
which contribute to the special historic and
aesthetic interest of that place, and its sensitive
interpretation will allow for appropriate
management of trees and larger shrubs.
The same is often not the case with
planting subject to tree preservation orders
(TPOs), especially where these are applied
on a blanket basis. Indeed, such a designation
can, ironically, be a disincentive to appropriate
management, with the result that over time
the proliferation of weed species and scrub
leads to a significant diminution of the special
historic interest and character of the designed
landscape through, for example, the erosion
of designed views. TPOs are thus a very
blunt weapon which should be used with
great discrimination and only in situations
where other designations more appropriate to
historic designed landscapes cannot be applied.
The future
At the time of writing we are at a point both
of great potential, and of great uncertainty.
PPS5 offers an exciting prospect for a
more unified and informed approach to
managing the historic environment, with
challenging opportunities for all involved
within it to demonstrate an understanding
of what makes a particular place ‘special’
and why it merits conservation, and to
what extent it may merit preservation.
However, the new coalition government’s
proposals for the protection of England’s
historic environment remain unclear.
Furthermore, the huge economic uncertainties
facing the country over the next few years call
into question the ability of either national or
local government to deliver key elements of
the new system. It is clear that far from being
revenue neutral the new system will require
significant investment from developers, local
authorities and the statutory consultees. In
the context of significant public spending
cuts, central government is unlikely to
provide, and with the present system already
stretched, ‘efficiency savings’ seem inevitable.
While it may not be possible to deliver the
entire reform programme in the short or even
medium term, at least we now have some key
elements of a system to which we can aspire.
Jonathan Lovie
has been an historic
landscape consultant since 1994. Between
1998 and 2002 he was retained by English
Heritage as a Consultant Register Inspector.
Since 2002 he has been the part-time
Principal Conservation Officer and Policy
Advisor to The Garden History Society, and
continues to practice as a private consultant.
This article has been updated by Cathedral
Communications, including a new
section entitled ‘PPS5: New Government
Policy’, in response to developments that
occurred after the article was written.