This article from DPP first appeared in City and Westminster Planning in August 2009.

The draft new Planning Policy Statement (PPS) on planning for the historic environment was published on 24th July with the stated aim of 'keeping up the momentum' of heritage protection reform. However, the document is in danger of making limited sense in the absence of corresponding legislation as the draft Heritage Protection Bill has not been progressed. 

Key aspects of the draft PPS:

• It replaces both PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment (1994) and PPG16: Archaeology and Planning (1990)
• It is short and succinct containing headline policies only
• It is supported by a separate English Heritage 'Practice Guide' – providing the related guidance
• Strong focus on understanding the nature and extent of significance of heritage assets when promoting and assessing change
• The concept of 'heritage assets' (building; monument; site or landscape of historic, archaeological, architectural or artistic interest,  - whether designated or not)
• Within this, 'designated assets' (World Heritage Sites, Listed Buildings, Protected Wreck Sites, Registered Parks or Gardens, Registered Battlefields or Conservation Areas)
• An emphasis on the development and maintenance of Historic Environment Records (HERs) by LPAs.
• Greater reference to the need to weigh wider community and public benefits that may accrue from proposals that could harm heritage assets
• Emphasis on the principles of sustainable development with reference to proposals to mitigate climate change.

Significance
The PPS proposes that a description of the significance of a heritage asset is required for validating applications where change is promoted. In preparing such descriptions the Historic Environment Records prepared by LPAs are to be consulted – although it is noted that these are yet to be fully established (another requirement of the aborted Heritage Protection Bill).

The PPS states that it should be borne in mind that not all elements of a World Heritage Site or Conservation Area will necessarily contribute to its significance. LPAs are however advised to consider how development may enhance the significance of negative or neutral elements to be seen as a positive public benefit and be 'part of the process of place making'.

Guiding Principles
Little reference is made to the existing statutory planning duties to preserve listed buildings and to preserve or enhance conservation areas.  Instead, reflecting concepts in the draft Bill, the draft PPS states that LPAs need to 'take into account the desirability of enhancing the significance of heritage assets'. However, there is no statutory force to this requirement. Heritage assets are also very broadly defined to include all buildings, sites, monuments etc of 'interest' – rather than the 'designated assets' (e.g. listed buildings and conservation areas) of special interest.

This could result in the PPG15 'demolition tests', retained but re-phrased in the PPS, being applied more widely to proposals affecting any 'heritage asset'.

The existing 'presumption in favour of preservation' changes to a more positive 'presumption in favour of conservation'.  This only relates to 'designated assets', with the PPS emphasising that this presumption becomes greater in proportion to the significance of the asset. The PPS also emphasises the importance of marketing and endeavours made to seek grant funding, in order to be certain that other less damaging ownership or uses are not possible.

In terms of design, where 'practicable', new development should respect the setting and reinforce the distinctiveness of heritage assets in terms of scale, height, massing, alignment and use of materials. However, the draft PPS makes explicit reference to PPS1 in that LPAs should 'take care to avoid stifling innovation and undermining investments in sustainable development'.

For the first time in Government guidance 'setting' is defined in the PPS as 'the area surrounding a heritage asset within which activity or development may affect the significance of that asset'.  Proposals should be treated favourably where they 'preserve those elements of the setting that enhance the significance of the asset'. Further, more detailed guidance on the often thorny issue of setting is promised by English Heritage for consultation later this year.

Summary
The key message of understanding the significance of a heritage asset is welcome and reflects current best practice in proposing change to the historic environment.

However, other terms and concepts used by the draft PPS, not recognised in existing primary or secondary legislation, are likely to be open to misinterpretation. Ironically, the existing PPG15, whilst outdated, does at least still correctly reflect the statutory duties of prevailing primary legislation.

Paradoxically, on the same day the draft PPS was released the CLG Circular on the Protection of World Heritage Sites was also published – to replace existing paragraphs of PPG15! Clearly, there remains much to be done to draw legislation, policy and guidance on the historic environment fully together.

Closing dates for comments to be made on both the draft PPS and the associated Practice Guide is 30th October 2009.